JUKI TL (2010) vs JUKI HZL-LB (2016)

The JUKI TL2000Qi (2010) is a great Sewing Machine for its $749 asking price.

The JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016), however, while a reasonable product for $499, doesn't stack up against its competitors quite as well. If you're considering Sewing Machines in the $410 range, you might want to check out some better options.

The JUKI TL2000Qi (2010) was loved by reviewers at Good Housekeeping, a trustworthy source that performs objective hands-on testing. It did great in their "11 Best Sewing Machines, According to Testing" roundup - in fact, they named it their "Best Sewing Machine for Expert Quilting". That, by itself, points toward it being a noteworthy Sewing Machine.

Moving on to the JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016): no sources that perform reliable and objective hands-on testing have included it in their Sewing Machine roundups, which usually means that a product doesn't make for a good purchase.

We conducted an analysis of all of the review data that we could find on these two products. First, we focused on sources that tested and rated both of them, like justtosew.org, and learned that they all showed a preference for the JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016).

Then we took a look at the highest review scores that these two Sewing Machines received. We found that the JUKI TL2000Qi (2010) managed to earn a rating of 8.8 from justtosew.org, whereas the JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016) got its highest, 9.4, score from reviewers at justtosew.org.

Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other Sewing Machines on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by Sewing Machines being 6.6 out of 10, whereas the JUKI TL2000Qi (2010) and JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016) managed averages of 8.8 and 9.2 points, respectively.

Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct JUKI TL2000Qi (2010) vs. JUKI HZL-LB5100 (2016) comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.